they remind me of ourselves a year ago. caught everyone off guard when no one really thought of them as a threat, built some confidence and rolled with it. while everyone is praising them now, they're on every teams radar.

Philly should be tough this year. They were a strong team toward the end of the season. Adding a year experience, and especially adding Brand make them a lot tougher. Ratliff gives them depth and a solid vet in the clubhouse.

they remind me of ourselves a year ago. caught everyone off guard when no one really thought of them as a threat, built some confidence and rolled with it. while everyone is praising them now, they're on every teams radar.

Well, we didn't add a perennial all star and consistent 20/10 guy that offseason.

Alot of what Philly does right now will depend on Andre Miller. If you watch his career closely you notice that when he is surrounded with talent, something happens to his game and he actually becomes a worst player. He was an average point guard when he and Elton Brand played the first time with eachother in Los Angeles (and you see how well that worked) and he was an average player in Denver. Andre always plays better or his game looks better when the offence in a weird way is focussed around him.

Plus, an achilles injury is a severe injury and I wouldn't be surprised to see Brand play pretty poorly (by his standards) this season.

Philly is good but I see them as a 43-44 win team this season. Good but not great.

my point was that they weren't that good of a team last season as they were being lead on to be.

so if it's cool, i'll continue to kid myself. thanks.

How were they not? They took a couple games against Detroit, and had a great 2nd half...that doesn't mean anything?

And my point is that Philly adding an all star in the offseason makes that comparison fall flat because they're a much different team this season, what with a new best player and all. The Raptors big pickup that offseason was Jamario Moon.

But by all means, continue to kid yourself all you want. You're welcome.

I'm saying it's not an apt comparison, because Philly got much better between seasons, where as the Raptors did not.

You're saying Philly is in trouble, as the Raps were, because teams are going to pay more attention to them next season. That's fine. You're correct to a degree.

I'm saying Philly is in significantly less trouble than the Raps due to the fact that they added an all star, which the Raps did not. So, you see, it is likely that they will not experience the same dip the Raptors did last year for two reasons. 1) They improved 2) They didn't have as good a record as we did in the first place.

Philly will be less affected by teams preparing for them than the Raptors were because they improved, while the Raptors did not.

Please explain to me how that is incorrect.

And as for me being a douchebag, my original "don't kid yourselves" comment was not directed at you specifically. It was in fact directed at the multiple people who have been saying they think Philly has a good roster but won't do well. You're the one who chose to respond with attitude. I say the exact same thing you did and I'm a douchebag? Why? For disagreeing?

1) you're reading a fortune cookie. you don't know anything more than that they've improved on paper. like CG said about miller, you don't know how players will adapt to a new offensive focus on the team. how will iggy and williams adapt? how will evans and daley respond with brand taking up their defensive zones? adding impact payers doesn't necessarily make a team improved, especially a team that won games based on chemistry and momentum.

oh

also, we didn't improve because of injuries. we didn't want to tinker with the chemistry that we built the previous season.

2)you don't need a comparable record to make comarisions. like philly last season, we were the hottest team in the second half. we completely jumped on teams sleeping on us until we had the confidence to carry us thru the rest of the season. much like how we capitalized the demise of the atlantic, the sixers capitalized on the demise of miami, chicago, and new jersey.

how exactly won't they be effected? they're being treated like a contender in the east. until proven otherwise, teams will be facing them like they belong. they were mediocre, now they'll be good. who's kidding who?

They will be affected, but less so because they made a dramatic upgrade. Yes, you can say that no one knows how much they'll actually improve, but they added an all star to a position where they started Reggie Evans last year. It's an improvement.

All I said originally was that, as opposed to the Sixers, we did not add a major talent in the offseason following a surprisingly good season. That makes a big difference. I don't see how you can argue that.

I didn't twist your point at all. I simply pointed out a major difference between the Raptors a year ago and the Sixers right now. That's all I've done throughout this entire discussion.

I didn't intend this to become any sort of argument. I wasn't trying to attack your comparison or anything, because in essence you're correct. All I wanted to say was that Philly is a very solid team. Better, in my opinion, than the Raptors of a year ago. That's it...it was meant more as an add on to your comment than an argument. The don't kid yourselves comment was meant to imply that people who don't think that Philly could be right there with the Raptors for second in the Atlantic could very well be unpleasantly surprised.

me - a lot of teams slept on the sixers this year like us the previous season. that's not going to happen this year.

you - they added brand therefore your statement is invalid

i guess we have different perceptions on creating an arguement.

i believe philly has a solid team as well, but i also believe that a lot of prove before we can consider them a home court team come next may. i still rank us strongly ahead of them. i also don't think o'neal will disrupt any chemistry on our team whereas brand most likely will with them.